Pages

11 January 2010

11/01/10

Mount Etna erupted in 1693. The accompanying earthquake destroyed 45 towns on Sicily and Malta and killed more than 60,000 people. William Herschel discovered two of Uranus's major moons. They were later named Oberon and Titania. Insulin was first used to treat diabetes in a human patient in 1922. Los Angeles received its first-ever recorded snowfall in 1949. And East Pakistan changed its name to Bangladesh in 1972.

In the eyes of Communism, a child is simply something to be warped, godless, ignorant of moral responsibility......Communism insinuates ideas of atheism false idealism.......We mustbe on our guard.....

Medve - you are a brave, brave man. I do occasionally read the climate change threads - if the writer is a scientist (the chap after the email thing, for example) - in the hope of learning something, but the BTL majority does weird me out a bit. There are a couple of sensible sorts, who, like the scientists posting on evolution threads, are happy to explain stuff to a passing amateur, and have been directed to some good stuff by them.

On the Purnell thread, ay ay, Princess, nice work! Was reading it when it first went up, but was too tired to craft any response that didn't rely heavily on swearing, so left it alone...

Have done my sums, and if I accept my NI assessment for 2009, and that isn't adjustable when my return goes in, it cost me €250 to do some work last year. So, another phone call to try to sort that out...if the phone worked. Am not in a very constructive frame of mind at the minute. Bah.

On the subject of posters, I came across this a while back. It seems that in Poland, cinemas commisioned their own posters for films, and the end results are frequently very good, and certainly as good as, if not better than the 'official' (i.e. studio) posters

Bonjour PhilippaB, thank you for your flattering comment, but i'm not so brave really. The fact is that there are a few sensible people posting some good stuff, floating in a sea of dross courtesy of the astro-surfers.

they're excellent. I like how sinister Audrey Hepburn is made to look in the 'Breakfast at Tiffany's' poster. What's also surprising is the amount of mainstream US cinema that appears to have been shown in Communist Poland.

The Purnell thread - gave up after 25 posts! When will these people realise that they have lost the trust of working people and pretending to offer goodies in the few months left before an election just loks like what it is a - a desperate attempt to cling onto power?

Bitterweed - I think it's the apparently unconscious mirroring of the approach of the people she condemns that puzzles me most. Is she really that lacking in self-awareness? So, it's not just the extremists who think a) that men are incapable of controlling their lusts and b) that this means women should cover themselves in a horse-blanket? Barking...

if you look at the wording of the P****ll piece, you will see that he keeps referring to 'Labour' and not 'New Labour'. This appears to be the radical policy, changing the name of the neo-liberals back to 'Labour'.

He only uses 'New Labour' pejoratively, despite himself being cloned from the DNA of Blair/Mandelson/Campbell and a ballsack.

On the Monbiot thread a certain Jozeph posits: It is interesting to see that even on the Guardian CIF, a left-leaning venue, there are plenty of climate sceptics, some of whom are quite knowledgeable. Consequently, I think George's pet issue is pretty much dead. If he can't win here, he can't win anywhere.

@Medve - the climate threads are astro'd at both extremes. There is a reason why people like mefinny2, gpwayne, bluecloud, bioluminescence, and others only turn up on that topic and no others.

As I said earlier, anyone who isn't a true believer of one dogma or its opposite gets trashed by both sides. It's a mug's game trying to attain any level of enlightenment there.

My own view is that the science is largely sound, but that it has been politicised beyond its limits and, in addition, has been seized on for political and economic purposes that it shouldn't sustain. Worse, thanks to the 'post-normal science' of people like Mike Hulme, scientific truth is being bent if not actually lied about to suit societal or political ends.

PhilippaB Yes, it was a bit confused. She seems to be using commodification of human sexual desire and the sexualisation of children as indicators of the need for "change", but doesn't offer any description of that "change", other than our need to become "serious". Basically it's two ideas floating around in one essay and made to meet where they don't really. She's basically saying "we're not helping the situation, we should be more modest", but what she also completely avoids is the amount of porn and prostitution and sexual subjugation and deviance consumed in Arab - even strict muslem - societies. It's a massive problem for women there too.

Re the 'science' need to invest more money in monitoring etc. The UEA emails show under-funding as much as anything, no professional programmer just a researcher bodging it. (Then piss away millions on IT projects.) Course some scientists may get a job out of it.

But is not just a physical issue but one of human action so of course it ends up being political. As I said, it is collective action. (And it is common to most of the other issues being discussed.)

Carbon trading is just a scam and has no effect on total CO2 and in any case the fundamental issue will remain - more people doing more stuff. This is a human social problem and needs responses at the systemic and the individual level.

Pen - recently read something where caron trading was likened to the Church selling plenary indulgences. That seemed to sum up the issue rather nicely. Be the biggest shit you want to be, but if you throw us some wonga, we'll be ok with it...

Thanks all for your kind words - it makes dealing with the slime that covers ones body after reading the words of the Shitdribble easier to deal with. (SirDaphne where are you??)

I cant go above the line though as I would invalidate my being signed off. I am hoping to start voluntary work though as soon as ths stomach thing is sorted out. I think you can do some paid work as well - under permitted work - but my consultant wants me to start with voluntary to see how much can do. After my mornings posting I went back to bed till two so hardly bodes well for full time work! Anyway I doubt 'permitted work' would include slagging off Workhouse Purnell on the Guardian.

Sheff I love that you told him to piss off. I really hate him. But I have said that many a time.

Sad news about Hopper.

Did anyone see that report by 'left wing' think tank Demos that Cameron is going on about. That it makes no difference to your life the level of wealth you are born into. Absolute fucking bollocks! Of course the shitdribble is still involved with them. I saw Frank Fields mug there too. Ugh!

Are we really going to run out of gas in six hours? If so I am off to fill a hot water bottle.

Echo the others princess - you could either do it for nothing (outrageous that you should have to btw), if getting paid a measly 80 quid would screw things up for you, or donate it not to His Grace's political party but my, about to be formed, Assassination Bureau.

Irony is that that shitdribble/fucktard's work turning the DWP into his gauleiters means that as I understand it, PCC could have her benefits stopped by writing the piece ATL and refusing payment, if payment was the norm as that would equate to turning down paid work, or if they believed, no matter how mistakenly that the composition of an article menat PCC wasn't available for work/to look for work for 40hrs in the week..Dime to a dollar salso says an investigation would be sparked at the very least. A model example of how to see dissent stifled

Is some new form of silent premod under way at the Graun? I keep posting comments, they take a long time to appear even after multiple refreshes, some eventually appear, some dont. Are other people finding this?

I think it is that you can do volunteer work (which is one good thing about the reforms) and that is what I want to start doing in the next couple of months- once seen the stomach guy and got that sorted. Just a couple of afternoons a week and build it up from there. From that once you, for example, know that you can do voluntary work for say two and a half days a week and manage it you can move onto permitted work.

Permitted work can be paid as long as it is less than eighty pounds a week (again another good thing) and gives you chance to build up your cv again and get back into the responsibilities of paid work. The idea is from there you build up to full time. Although my specialist says due to severity of ME is unlikely will be able to do full time - certainly not in the short term. But I am lucky many people are off for about six years with ME before being able to try voluntary work.

The big issue is when being re assessed - nearly everyone I know through the ME support group has been found 'fit for work'. Because the new ESA test cannot test for such complicated ideas as stamina. They would see me - walking - able to pick a coin up off the floor and say I could work. But obviously if after blogging on here - from my bed on my netbook - I have to have a nap or if after taking my dogs out for a fifteen minute stroll I have to lie down (I have a respiratory illness too and the stomach issue). Then there is no way I could work. I can do some things but only for a short period of time and then I have to rest. Or I have to rest in between doing stuff. Also some days (few and far between) I may feel almost normal whereas others I cannot do a thing. Today I have spent all day in bed except for making a sandwich and slept in- between a couple of bursts of writing (and writing is easy for me because I am a really quick, touch typist so it doesnt take me long to bash out a comment).

So the good bits of Shitdribbles reforms are pretty useless because most people are being thrown onto JSA before they can get that help and that transition into work because the tests do not understand anything other than someone who is totally disabled.

And the thing is although all this is bad enough for people like me I keep thinking about people with cancer or end stage kidney failure etc and it literally makes me cry. I can imagine only too well how horrendously sick they must be and having to face these terrible tests and then go through the stress of an appeal - well I do not know how they cope.

I am off again as really tired today and I am going to lie down for another half an hour. I also do not want, right now, the stress of having to do anything to a deadline etc. It would probably be too much for me. It is one thing to bash out a comment quite another to write an article for a certain time. But I tell you who should do a piece above the line in my opinion - AlisdairCameron - who has been writing consistently brilliant comments on these reforms and also mental health services. Or, if he doesn't want to do it I also think Rednorth writes some excellent, storming posts on this. Anyway sorry for the very long post!

I know someone with cancer who was assessed shortly after a very major operation and declared fit to go back to work - completely against the opinion of his consultant and GP, not to mention his boss. Idiots.

God what a day! Starting off with that slime ball Purnell and all the shit and treachery he represents, then the Medical foundation report and now on C4 news an horrific report on people trafficking in Mexico. I despair, I really do. Think a large stiffener is on order...

BB - Also the children - which is one of the major problems with the fast track decision making system - they can be returned before they've been given the chance to disclose. AS caseworkers aren't famous for being able to detect the signs either.

PhilippaB - 're the climate change thread, am just remembered of this quote from somewhere:

"weather may be, but climate is"'

I remember that one coming from a Chalet School story when I was a kid... (blushes & hides face)

Re capacity for work - when I worked for the CAB x number of yrs ago, our rate of successful ICB/DLA appeals nationally was running at around 60%, poss higher - and that's not counting the claimants who couldn't, or didn't know how to challenge decisions themselves - doesn't sound as though anything's changed much since then, despite the number of Social Policy forms that must have been submitted and the evidence reports written - ie this one

BB: just read it, but didn't comment. My physics degree says that there is something profoundly fishy about three steel/concrete high-rise structures allegedly failing as a result of fires, all in one day. (The third one was building 7)

And no thorough investigation of what is after all a major crime scene, rather secretive export of scrap metal. I won't go on.

onomatopoeicadj 1: of or relating to or characterized by onomatopoeia [syn: onomatopoetic] 2: (of words) formed in imitation of a natural sound; "onomatopoeic words are imitative of noises"; "it was independently developed in more than one place as an onomatopoetic term"- Harry Hoijer [syn: echoic, imitative, onomatopoeical, onomatopoetic] [ant: nonechoic]

BB--re the right wingnuts spin on 9/11.Many do blame it on Clinton, even though there were warnings of impending disaster. How susceptible some of the sheeple are to this neocon crap. I read 'Blowback' by Chalmers Johnson in which he describes the ill feeling and effects of US foreign policy around the world. A good read.

Now, I'm going to have a stiff one too, but not the sort that thaum and Sheff mentioned.

Scherfig: To be sure two medium-sized passenger aircraft were apparently deliberately flown into the two towers. Those buildings had been designed to withstand such an "accident". Building 7 had no aircraft flown into it, but nevertheless collapsed in the same way as the twin towers later in the day.

medve, the Marriottt, and buildings 4, 5 and 6 were also damaged beyond repair, and although they didn't collapse, they were later demolished. People seem to overlook this. WTC7 was 47 floors high, the other buildings were 'low-rise'. Also, despite what you say, I don't think anyone in the 1960's designed buildings with a structural design specifically tailored to withstand the impact of crashing jetplanes (or even conceived of such an event). I think their concern was more the load bearing of hundreds of floors and the sway of the building at the top.

Scherfig: I hope I am not a wingnut, but saw an interview with the architect, who stated that the towers were designed to withstand a collision with a boeing 707, comparable in size to the aircraft that actually hit the buildings.

yes, the 707 variant with the least fuel capacity had room for 16065 US gallons of kerosene. the 757 with the greatest fuel capacity can take 11466 US gallons of kerosene. whereas Swirsky mistakenly says: "SWIRSKY: And also the fuel capacity is much more tremendous. "

Shaz - the Chalet School! I used to have all of them (took up a lot of bloody space) - yes, that was probably it, heh heh.

Re the WTC and architectural tolerances etc, I vaguely remember seeing a doc discussing the design claims and that it was the near-full fuel load that threw them off? i.e. that whatever the intention to protect them against, say, a plane impact, what actually hit them was different.

Have to admit I have no truck with the conspiracy theories about the event. The sheer dumb stupidity of the foreigh policy thereafter, however...

@Medve - I'm not sure that last statistic is right; the two planes that hit the WTC towers were Boeing 767s, each of which had a higher fuel capacity than the 707. The 767 also has a 30ft wider wingspan, 10ft more in height, and up to 20 tons more takeoff weight.

You're right, though, that when the WTC was designed the 707 collision was the worst thing they could think of.

PhilippaB, Boudican, Bitterweed: No idea who planned and instigated the atrocities. Do know that what we have been told about it officially is much like the present Know Nothings line that it didn't happen under republican watch.

Just to add, fuel to the flames :0)Although the architects 'considered' the possibility of aircraft impact, it's not actualy known if the design incorporated any features regarding this.Firstly, in the 1960's the technology to model?analyze this accurately would not have been there.And secondly, the original documentation of the study, which was part of the building's 1,200 page structural analysis, was lost when the Port Authority offices were destroyed in the collapse of the WTC 1; the copy was lost in WTC 7

Boudican: goodnightSherfig: I'll bicker with you one last time on this. The design "feature" is the sheer mass of steel and concrete. In the 1960s the energy content of 16000 US gallons of kerosene was well known.

I saw the horrendous aftermath when an ElAl cargo 747 had crashed into a flats building amsterdam.

PeterJ - ta - damnit - still off - it came back on after 15 mins yesterday, so i wondered if they were just binning the news. why not wait another hour, and mess with the world service imports instead? anyway, 'americana' was pretty good this week...